On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 10:05:49AM +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 10:23:07AM +0100, Erik Skultety wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 07:35:54PM +0100, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> > Vim won't recognize them, and thus not enable niceties
> > such as syntax highlighting, otherwise.
>
> So, is there a strict reason for the *inc.am naming? Reading through [1] gave me
> the necessary background, but is there an inherent issue naming all of the
> Makefiles in subdirectories to Makefile.am, I mean, we'd still end up including
> those, or does that go against some automake rules?
I picked Makefile.inc.am because I think it would be confusing to name
them Makefile.am when they are not self-contained automake files. They
can only ever be used when included from teh real Makefile.am. I'm not
inclined to rename them just for sake of editor mode settings.
We previously removed editor settings from all files, in favour of
putting such configs in the root of the source tree. eg the emacs
.dir-locals.el, .ctags, .color_coded.in, etc
Yeah, I didn't like the vim annotation, since we should not favour a single
editor, what you suggest makes more sense if the below plugin works reliably
and doesn't mess with all of your favourite .vimrc settings.
Assuming this plugin:
https://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=441
it appears we could have a $GIT/.vimrc file for this purpose.
So, I'm not sure I 100% understand what it does from the description, would it
only replace ("patch") the stuff that is relevant to the project, leaving all
of the other settings coming from your ~/.vimrc config in effect?
Erik